I'm saying its ironic that these kids are saying America is in such a shitty state but at the same time they using their personal laptop to say it
some countries dont have such luxuries

Oh i thought u were discussing national affairs, because in that case, nothing is wrong with the scenario you decribed

different time, different situation

Hmm... war, airport safety precautions after 911... Nope, none of those will put a country in debt

I dont think you understand what I meant

Please elaborate

I'm saying its ironic that these kids are saying America is in such a shitty state but at the same time they using their personal laptop to say it
some countries dont have such luxuries

Oh i thought u were discussing national affairs, because in that case, nothing is wrong with the scenario you decribed

That is why both sides don't work, they should be working on the middle class more than the other 2, just both sides suck. Like republicans are the sith and democrats are the jedi...I want to be a Revanite then.

No, but in the show Yugi ends up winning and Pegasus is the bad guy.

Look, I was disagreeing with your assertion that Obama is a socialist. He is not. Socialism means government control of industry and resources. Obama has not nationalized any industries since coming into office, nor does he support doing so. He does support social programs like Social Security and Medicare, but so do most Americans and so has every president since those programs were created. Even Obamacare, authoritarian as the mandate may be, still relies on private for-profit insurance companies to insure people (except for the Medicaid expansion, which is the least controversial part of the law).

For what it's worth, I am also leaning toward Romney over Obama.

Kindly link me to it.

I did not say it was Bush's fault. People have been on welfare long before Obama and Bush. The fact that the number of welfare recipients increased during Obama's presidency can be attributed at least partly to the economic crisis. Presidents have relatively little control over the economy. Even if you do directly attribute it to Obama's policies, that still does not make him a socialist. I'm pretty sure Obama did not intentionally cause people to be dependent on government assistance.

1) welfare rate went up. 2) gas prices went up. 3) Michelle Obama has been laying down plans that regard the dinner intake for children nation wide. I wonder what the Obama ministry will try to "take care of" next if he gets a second term. Don't think that I'm a Romney fan but i would take anyone over Obama any day

Look, I was disagreeing with your assertion that Obama is a socialist. He is not. Socialism means government control of industry and resources. Obama has not nationalized any industries since coming into office, nor does he support doing so. He does support social programs like Social Security and Medicare, but so do most Americans and so has every president since those programs were created. Even Obamacare, authoritarian as the mandate may be, still relies on private for-profit insurance companies to insure people (except for the Medicaid expansion, which is the least controversial part of the law).

For what it's worth, I am also leaning toward Romney over Obama.

Kindly link me to it.

>implying Obama caused that

Bush's fault? when Reagan was in office no one complained about all his issues being Carter's fault..

I did not say it was Bush's fault. People have been on welfare long before Obama and Bush. The fact that the number of welfare recipients increased during Obama's presidency can be attributed at least partly to the economic crisis. Presidents have relatively little control over the economy. Even if you do directly attribute it to Obama's policies, that still does not make him a socialist. I'm pretty sure Obama did not intentionally cause people to be dependent on government assistance.

1) welfare rate went up. 2) gas prices went up. 3) Michelle Obama has been laying down plans that regard the dinner intake for children nation wide. I wonder what the Obama ministry will try to "take care of" next if he gets a second term. Don't think that I'm a Romney fan but i would take anyone over Obama any day

Look, I was disagreeing with your assertion that Obama is a socialist. He is not. Socialism means government control of industry and resources. Obama has not nationalized any industries since coming into office, nor does he support doing so. He does support social programs like Social Security and Medicare, but so do most Americans and so has every president since those programs were created. Even Obamacare, authoritarian as the mandate may be, still relies on private for-profit insurance companies to insure people (except for the Medicaid expansion, which is the least controversial part of the law).

For what it's worth, I am also leaning toward Romney over Obama.

Kindly link me to it.

Interrupting and being a dick to the moderator several times over the course of a debate > one rude comment to the moderator over the course of the debate.

That's why.

heresy*?

well gov. Romney won the debate without doubt

I am going to start posting this to anyone who takes one side of the retarded democrat/liberal republican/conservative bullshit.

good to know

It works up here in Canada

>implying Obama is a socialist

half the population is relying on welfare :/

>implying Obama caused that

Bush's fault? when Reagan was in office no one complained about all his issues being Carter's fault..

I did not say it was Bush's fault. People have been on welfare long before Obama and Bush. The fact that the number of welfare recipients increased during Obama's presidency can be attributed at least partly to the economic crisis. Presidents have relatively little control over the economy. Even if you do directly attribute it to Obama's policies, that still does not make him a socialist. I'm pretty sure Obama did not intentionally cause people to be dependent on government assistance.

1) welfare rate went up. 2) gas prices went up. 3) Michelle Obama has been laying down plans that regard the dinner intake for children nation wide. I wonder what the Obama ministry will try to "take care of" next if he gets a second term. Don't think that I'm a Romney fan but i would take anyone over Obama any day

Look, I was disagreeing with your assertion that Obama is a socialist. He is not. Socialism means government control of industry and resources. Obama has not nationalized any industries since coming into office, nor does he support doing so. He does support social programs like Social Security and Medicare, but so do most Americans and so has every president since those programs were created. Even Obamacare, authoritarian as the mandate may be, still relies on private for-profit insurance companies to insure people (except for the Medicaid expansion, which is the least controversial part of the law).

For what it's worth, I am also leaning toward Romney over Obama.

Kindly link me to it.

That sounds like a well-researched statement about the man who was left with a mop and bucket to clean up after the bush kim jongistration. I almost gave a fuck about your expert opinion there.

kim jong? XD

when Reagen was in office after Jimmy Carter (worst president ever.. besides obama) no one bitched that Carter was responsible for Reagans work.. liberal media now a days, tisk tisk

fair * ....